On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 12:58:32PM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Tue, 25 Apr 2006, David Powers wrote:
How can one do object-oriented PD (there are at least some parallels), and how might that differ from other approaches?
First you have to avoid those who say that PD is only for music and/or video; they can't put the word "application" or "program" on a patch or a set of patches, it has to be called "patches".
Second you have to avoid those who say PD isn't object-oriented and especially those who think that you should not use anything that "looks" too object-oriented because it wouldn't fit the "dataflow paradigm", whatever that is.
Third is a rule for OOP in general, in any language: the final goal is never to make a program "more OOP", it's to make a program better, by any "paradigm" necessary.
Fourth, watch out for communists, who are all out to get you.
paint a complete picture, no matter which programming language it is being asked about, even though I think that Pd has more holes than almost all programming languages.
So why are you still using it?
Best,
Chris.
chris@mccormick.cx http://mccormick.cx